Jump to content

Aperson

Members
  • Posts

    276
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by Aperson

  1. And if the entire system was socialistic, said person wouldn't lose anything besides that inherent to the accident. Thanks for that excellent argument for a socialistic health care system.
  2. quote:Originally posted by Jaguar: H5N1 is the bird flu, if I remember correctly, and the chances of it mutating to human to human contraction is about as likely as new comet being discovered on a collision course with earth. About 1 in a billion or more..... The brd flu scare is just that, a scare tactic, and it's just as much nonsense as man is causing global warming. You do realise that the last major pandemic (1918) was the result of a virus jumping from one species to another. You also realise that this requires relatively little change to the virus (and the H5N1 virus already has some of the mutations...) http://www.newscientist.com/channel/health/dn8103
  3. I would consider leaving someone to die to be immoral. But really, charity seems to do the best when there is some big disaster as opposed to something being lesser at any one time, but being a continous effect. Oh and quote:And how does Medicare explain the high prices as countries that have mixed health-care systems (e.g. Canada) still manage to have lower healthcare costs.
  4. Eh, the only problem with not vacinating some people is that it makes it impossible to "destroy" the virus (which, by the way, would increase the chance of the virus mutating and affecting thoses immunized). Granted, there probably won't be enough vaccinations for developed countries, let alone the whole world...
  5. Correct, all American citizens should get a health identification card much like Ontario (and I think the rest of Canada) has. However instead of not treating illegals (that would be immoral) said illegals should than soon after be deported (unless they have proper identification, in which case they arenÔÇÖt an illegal). If someone a visiting member they should have to pay. And how does Medicare explain the high prices as countries that have mixed health-care systems (e.g. Canada) still manage to have lower healthcare costs.
  6. Current flu vaccines didn't protect against H5N1 I thought. Except the one developed by that one (swedeish?) company, but it can't be produced fast enough.
  7. quote:Originally posted by Prez: Capitalism is an economic model. What the heck does it have to do with mortality rates? Comparing apples to toilet brushes again? Perhaps nothing. But currently the US health care model is horribly flawed in some way as Americans pay the most (per capita) but don't seem to get any benefit of that. Soback: I would agree that the welfare model needs to be changed.
  8. quote:Originally posted by Soback: The REAL sad part is that the socialists in US are trying to, and in some cases already have, made it MANDATORY to get those shots. Sometimes Americans boggle the mind. But the question is: how much mercury in the flu shot?
  9. Money can be power. However, not all things that allow a person to be powerful can acomplish the same thing, and it dosn't always have to be over people. Money of course can't directly do things that strength or intelliegnce can, e.g. move a boulder or do stupidly hard math. However it can be used to hire someone to do above, buy a peice of equipment to do so, bribe someone etc. allowing a person, indirectly, to become "more powerful". Yes, you could view it as freedom I suppose, but power can help you become "more free". Which also helps explain when some people do stupid things for it. quote: Really, so if a company made a product that is so bad as to be useless to you, you would still buy it? The CEO, owner of that company have that much power as to get money out of you without your consent? They really hold that much power? WOW. Unbelievable. By now you probably realized what a folly that statement of yours was, and also realized who has the ultimate power, as NO BUSSINESS can FUNCTION without PROFITS. The ONLY bussiness or industry that can function without profits is GOVERNMENT RUN BUSSINESS/INDUSTRY. That's why government run bussiness/industry ALWAYS end up bleeding the country dry till collapse. Advertisments can be scarily effective sometimes (especialy when aimed at younger audiences). quote: So having 50% of your earnings taken away and given to another is somehow better than having 100% of your earnings confiscated? Err, yeah (unless if you got to choose between losing half your money and all of it you would have an equal chance to choose one or the other). Granted having taxes that dosn't involve income tax would be best. quote: So taking 50% as opposed to taking 100% to run the society is what? Mind clearning up how you "half" run a sociaty. About your tone: Placing in the "Too much to read?", implying that people have a mental disorder and that they are uneducated etc. etc. is what I view as a having a "insulting tone". If you had only a factual tone, I would have no problem, but you don't. Also, if you are percived with a tone you don't think you have, I would think one might want to look into it a bit harder. quote: So me telling someone why they are wrong is veiled insults? No this: quote: Too much for you to read maybe? is what I would consider a "veiled insult". Some things to think about: The US has the highest cost per capita than any other country despite not having the highest life expectansy or not having the lowest child mortality rates. However, this might have more to do with the US health care system liking to pump people full of drugs rather than look at lifestyle choices. Private company researchers are many more times likely to get a positive result for a drug than goverment agencies. However, laws implemented to stop drug companies from firing/sueing a researcher for negative results might help this problem. Also requireing companies to release research after a certain amount of time should help. http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/sub...rescribing.html (Blah, don't you hate it when you pick up a tidbit of information somewhere yet fate seems to conspire against you so you can't find it)
  10. quote:Originally posted by Soback: You dissagree? That's your whole argument? Try again Aperson. Let me teach you. Give reasons and use FACTS and logic to back up those reasons with. Emotions won't argue your points here for you. That only works on political arena in front of an ignorant audience. quote:Originally posted by Jaguar: A little bit of socialism, is like being a "little bit" Pregnant... Is a person who is a "little bit" religious the same as someone who is devote? Is the person who drinks a "little bit" of alcohol at the same mental state as someone who drinks copious amounts? quote:Originally posted by Soback: And no, I didn't. I told you what I picture when I read a reply directed at me as an insult. It doesn't apply only to Nomad, it applied to ANYONE who argues facts with insults.Eh? It can be interpreted that way. Plus your insulting tone in your posts when someone disagrees with you (or even if they havenÔÇÖt yet) doesnÔÇÖt help your arguments. quote:Originally posted by Soback: As for me missing your point. What was your point then? You said that I broke my rules. What would that be? Err, perhaps it would be clearer if I rephrased: Why did jump on nomad for insulting you (rightfully so) and yet don't mind making veiled insults? Unless insulting for no reason (especially when your making a point ) is ok with you (which I would question). quote:Originally posted by Jaguar: Do you believe that man is inherently giving, or that man is inherently greedy?I would like to think the former, but some things make me question that. But certainly most people are generous to people they know well and like (for obvious reasons). Also experiments have shown that humans (and some other animals) have a very strong sence of "fairness", even if enforcing it results as a loss to themselves. quote: Originally posted by nomad: It's funny that a guy who called me monster and abomination accuses me to insult him. Do you mind to cite any instance ? There are lots, don't kid yourself.
  11. quote:Originally posted by Soback: First, there's no difference between a little socialism and a lot of socialism. I disagree. quote:Originally posted by Soback: Second. How did you put it? Me bashing Nomad on his insults? So you saying he insulted me first and I bashed him back? Lets see, first of all, if he insulted me first and I were to bash him back, I would be FULLY justified in replying to his insult with any retort I want, however, seeing as I do not care about Nomads opinion about me, his insults mean zilch to me, I usually don't even reply to them. So, in light of all this, why don't you go ahead and QUOTE me where I steped in and insulted Nomad first. I doubt you will. I however, can with absolute 100% certainty quote you Nomads posts insulting me outright. You know what my reply is? I laugh, because in instances like that, I picture a grown man with an under-developed sence or reasoning and the best reply that man can come up with to counter facts brought up in a disscussion he has an opposing view in, is insult thrown towards a man presenting him those facts. ROFL, guess whos position is strenghtened in that situation. You missed my point... (oh and you just did )
  12. quote:Originally posted by Soback: Yeah Aperson, good reasoning there, great intellectual and factual response about how socialism is different from slavery. Both systems take the products of labor, be it physical or mental, by force, and give/spend it for benefits of those who haven't worked for it. Good come back to three long posts with easy to read explanations that appeal to your REASONING sence, with statements that are FACTUAL. Too much for you to read maybe? Next time, try replying with a coherent, reasoning statement, backed up by facts. It wasn't an argument or even a response. My answer was a semi-question (made up words, yay!), which you didn't say anything about. Therefore based on what you said and what I consider "loose" I came to that conclusion. But, to be honest, some of your argument hinges on the communist-style socialism while others were just weird, some did make a bit of sence fortunatly. Oh, and for a person who bashed nomad on his insults you certainly don't mind breaking your own rule.
  13. quote:Originally posted by Aperson: Depends on how loose you use the word slavery... Fairly loose then.
  14. Depends on how loose you use the word slavery...
  15. quote:Originally posted by Soback: And Aperson. In US, people usually commit suicide either after they had a lot and lost it all, or realize half their life went by and they threw it away without accomplishing anything. In China (socialism), people commit suicide because they tried, and realize that they CAN NOT accomplish anything because the more they make and the harder they try, the more is taken away from them and the more they are watched over and opressed. Once they realize that they can not change their own country, as any negative thing they say is monitored, then they are labeled an enemy of the people and dissapear, their only choice being emmigrating (not always possible), living a life of slavery (not a choice for a human mind that knows freedom and it's own potential, servitude is a choice for ignorants, hence the saying, ignorance is bliss), that's why some choose to change their country against all ods and end up being tortured and dying in some prison, and some take their own life. That's China, you know, an extreme. That doesnÔÇÖt explain why Canada and the US have had very similar suicide rates whilst having very similar cultures (regardless of what some Canadians may try to tell you), yet one is much more socialistic than the other (which economic model you attributed high suicide rates to).
  16. Soback: There is little correlation between economic model and suicide rates. Indeed, the United States and Switzerland don't have the lowest suicide rates despite being (correct me if I'm wrong) the most capitalistic countries in the world. And if you argue the fact that, that doesnÔÇÖt take into account culture, Canada and the US have had, in general, similar suicide rates.
  17. Blah, I was going to call Americans silly, but then found out that this kinda happens in Canada. But not to the extreams listed above.
  18. So, he's dishonest for a politician, that's kinda of scary.
  19. See, here in Canada, we have a slightly different view on that. Its ok to make fun of our military as long as you only insult the (lack of) equipment or funding (for the most part).
  20. That saying someone terrorizes != calling someone a terrorist... And I wouldn't use what Kerry says as examples of his intelligence (or lack there of) as I'm sure its not that hard to get examples of President Bush saying idiotic things.
  21. I wouldn't equate him saying them terrorizing people as calling them terrorists. As, although the definition for terrorist involves that, its current meaning has shifted enough from that for that connection to be not appropriate. Granted what he said wasn't appropriate but that doesnÔÇÖt have to do with the point I was trying to make.
  22. quote:Originally posted by Prez: I absolutely agree about conservatism and liberalism not being monolithic, Race. Look at Silk and myself. We completely disagree on the Iraq war, for example, yet we both call ourselves conservatives. Jag and I disagree on what is science and what is religion, and again, we are conservatives. Which is why I really don't like the Left/Right way of labelling political positions. And is also why I think this is rather nifty (although, it dosn't solve all the problems). Soback: As long as the US officially ends its trade agreements, I'm perfectly fine with them increasing import tariffs or other regulations involving imports/exports.
  23. I'm sure Heinz would just focus more of its advertising on other countries if what you are suggesting managed to succeed.
  24. I read it. Then again I'm of the opinion that Terrorism (in whatever form it takes) will exist as long as the human race does.
×
×
  • Create New...